When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Well, my 455 doesn't sit in an Oldsmobile either, and I really didn't notice or even really care about the part with the LS. There wouldn't even be many an Oldsmobile engine, parts or bodies today, if people thought that way. The same for Pontiac and many other brands. GM certainly didn't even think that way either or Oldsmobile.
I am not a fan of the LS motors either, because I don't know much about them as they are rather foreign to me, because they are a later design after I was so active in building anything, and nothing from my past. But my younger friends tell me they are cheaper than dirt, plentiful, powerful, and well designed and made.
I put the Olds V8 in everything I can, including a couple of chebby trucks. The LS makes big hp with just a couple of mods but lacks bottom end torque, which I don't like.
If you go with a 3.43 or higher gear and a 400 trans, forget about cruising down most highways (60mph+)
If my memory serves me correctly, GM refused to put AC on cars with gears higher than 3.23 because of issues with overheating and excessive wear.
The overdrive trans was one of the best advances in automotive technology. It reduced MPG, reduced engine wear, prevented overheating due to sustained high RPM, allowed one to run 3.73 + gears and still cruise the highway at 65mph at 2,100 RPM.
With that being said, the TH-400 was one the strongest transmissions ever built in stock form. Whichever engineer did that trans deserved an award.
I have a 2004R in my Olds but that thing had to be rebuilt by specialist in California (Bruce Toelle) who did transmissions for GN's. I can cruise down the highway at 70mph while I have a 3.73 gear.
Huh? My 69 H/O with TH400 and 3.91s has no problems on highways.
Like you, I have been a muscle car enthusiast for a long time, specifically 30 years for me.
The definition of "streetable" in the old muscle car scene is about as vast as the North Pole is from the South Pole. What is streetable to one guy is a drag car to another guy.
Remember, the show Street Outlaws claim the 6 second cars they run are "streetable" cars. They are basically ProStock vehicles but they claim they are street cars with no problems. So that pretty much sums it up on what I mean by peoples definition of street cars.
So I will just post the numbers. A 3.91 gear with a 28" tall tire and a TH-400 with a non-lockup converter at 65-70mph will see 3,500 - 3,900 RPM depending on how loose the converter is.
A 3.91 gear with a 28" tall tire and a 2004R with a lockup converter at 65-70mph will see 2,000 - 2,200 RPM
For me, streetable highway use means 65-70mph for 30-45 minutes while on the highway while it's 90F outside. Vehicle doesn't run hot, trans temp below 180F, engine oil temp is 220F or lower.
The above results cannot be done with a 3.91 gear and a 1:1 ratio with no lockup converter. Engine temps will skyrocket, engine wear will be accelerated, oil temps will easily climb over 250F and trans temps will be pushing 220F+.
I know, I had a 3.73 gear with a TH-400 and I could NOT do the above without screaming the engine and having problems. I installed a 2004R and now I can do the above with a 3.73 gear and the engine stays at 180F, trans at 150F, engine oil at 210F with a 455 Olds humming at 2,100 RPM.
Last edited by pettrix; August 8th, 2018 at 08:14 PM.
Also, with the 2004R you have better gear multiplier/acceleration due to the steeper 1st & 2nd gear ratio:
2004R - 1st gear ratio = 2.73 // 2nd gear ratio = 1.57
TH400 - 1st gear ratio = 2.48 // 2nd gear ratio = 1.48
4th gear (overdrive) in a 2004R = 0.67
Ideally, if I installed 4.10 gears instead of the 3.73 gears I currently have, the car would be quicker. That might be my next project. Replace the 3.73 gears with 4.10
Last edited by pettrix; August 8th, 2018 at 09:14 PM.
If you go with a 3.43 or higher gear and a 400 trans, forget about cruising down most highways (60mph+)
Gol Dayum. I wish I had known that when I had my 68 H/O with 3.91's, or the 70 W-30 with 3.91's that I ordered new. I drove them 100 miles one way to a distant drag strip every Saturday during the summer. Hmmmmmm, I wonder why I didn't have any problems. My 65 4-4-2 with 4.33's never overheated during the summer either. Maybe the close ratio Muncie made the difference.
Last edited by OLDSter Ralph; August 8th, 2018 at 10:44 PM.
Reason: correct typo's
Yes, except the part of an LS going into a Pontiac
Hey there now, I resemble that remark!
Seriously, w/ a 455 I'd stick w/ the stronger TH400 and keep the rear gearing reasonable for highway driving. I went w/ a 200-4R and 3.90 rear gears since my under-hood plans are for a screaming SBO. This combination actually keeps my top-gear RPMs lower than the original Jetaway / 2.78 combo that came in my car from the factory, even more so when the torque converter locks-up. Getting 20+ MPG on the highway was not hard to do w/ my 350-2bbl, my best tank ever was 23 MPG averaging around 70 MPH from Kansas City to Indy. City mileage sucked though, around 11-12 MPG before the swap, not any better after the swap. I've yet to get this out to run a tank on the highway though, fingers crossed when that day comes.
Last edited by JohnnyBs68S; August 9th, 2018 at 04:48 AM.
If you go with a 3.43 or higher gear and a 400 trans, forget about cruising down most highways (60mph+)
I have to disagree with you as well on some of this from personal experience. While I agree that yes engine screams and increase engine wear, I did not experience any type of overheating problems. I ran a 350 with a TH400, 3.91 gear, with AC and a fairly loose converter. I used to go every year to Lansing for Homecoming from Mt Clemens which is about 180 miles round trip. Must have made that trip at least 10 times over the years (yes I've had my car a long time). Always cruised around 55 to 60 mph. Now I have to admit I never ran the AC while cruising on the highway, but did plenty of times around the neighborhood. I also drove to Milan and Ubly drag strips. I ran the car several passes on those tracks, drove home without incident. I think a lot of the over heat issues are poor quality engine rebuilds with issues like pistons too tight. I have personally seen more issues of running hot from poor builds. I'd take a low mileage untouched original engine over some of these rebuilds. It's hard to find a good builder not to mention quality parts for our Olds these days.
You are right on the general not allowing cars from the factory with AC and numerically rears lower than 3.08 or 3.23 I believe. Most likely due to overheat concerns, true. I do agree with your comments about streetable. It's all personal preference. Oh and will admit I never cared for how the car ran on the highway at those speeds with that rpm, but never had problems.
Another option for guys wanting to run numerically low gears and keeping a TH400 is to change the gear set. I did the math and if you use a 2.75 1st gear planetary instead of a stock 2.48 1st with a 3.23 gear it's almost the same as the stock 1st gear ratio with a 3.91 from a dead stop. 3rd gear will always be 1:1 but you'll have a 3.23. Even a 3.08 would be better. Of course this a very pricey option since a quality aftermarket gear set for the th400 will likely cost you $600 or better.
Last edited by cman442; August 9th, 2018 at 08:04 AM.
I didn't want to debate "streetable" as the stories will start coming out. Some guy running 4.56 gears with a spool and alcohol injection doing 80mph down the freeway and picking up his kids at school when it was 90F outside, do a run down the dragstrip with his kids, and then go to Lowe's for some project pickups. I've been around for 30 years and have heard all the stories so I just prefer not to debate it.
Case-in-point, 6 second ProStock cars on Street Outlaws are toted as "streetable" cars.
GM Engineers refused to install AC in cars with gears over 3.23. They didn't just randomly pick that number. They had a reliability and overheating issue they had to address with a 1:1 ratio trans.
For some having the engine scream at 4,000RPM down the highway is OK but for engineers, it's not.
Last edited by pettrix; August 9th, 2018 at 09:19 AM.
No need to get defensive or take it personally just because someone disagrees with you. If could give you some sort of proof other than I had this car since I was 18 and did those things over the last 30 years! No BS or stories my friend. I totally agreed with you on most of your points other than saying that it you'll have over heating problems. I did it and had no problems, as others are saying as well. I know there are people out there have had problems too. I stated I didn't care for the engine rpm at those speeds which was one of your points. Others might not care so much about the engine rpm's. Also the car had 245\60-14 tires on it at the times which works out to be under 26" for tire height so that made things worse. I'm 46 so have been around 30+ years and heard it all too. Just my 2 cents based on my real life experience regarding the topic. Not based on some thing heard.
I see too much of this on these sites where people become condescending with posts. He simply asked for advice. My story is no story it's what I experienced with my car. it's not like the guy that says well I read in this magazine or posts something he read some where. My apology if I seem a little defensive, just didn't care for the "stories" comment.
Last edited by cman442; August 9th, 2018 at 12:22 PM.
For me, streetable highway use means 65-70mph for 30-45 minutes while on the highway while it's 90F outside. Vehicle doesn't run hot, trans temp below 180F, engine oil temp is 220F or lower.
I think people are spoiled by new cars with double OD transmissions. No one here is claiming that the "street driven" cars on Drag Week (for example) are actually streetable, but the fact remains that when classic musclecars were new, they drove all day long at freeway speed (and that's pre-oil embargo freeway speeds) without overheating or the other world-ending problems you suggest. GM tested these cars for hours on the high speed track at the desert proving grounds before releasing them to the public. If you don't want to spin your motor that high, that's your call. 3500 RPM for sustained periods is not going to kill a 455 in good shape, nor will it damage the TH400 mated to it.
Just to add another data point, my truck has a 454, 4L80E, and 4.10 gears. Due to the weak, two-plate clutch pack in the 4L80E overdrive, you should tow in third (1:1) and not OD. I drove six hours to Kingsport for the 2016 OCA Nationals with a truck full of swap meet parts and my car on a trailer in 90+ degree weather both ways with no issues whatsoever. Yeah, my 255/85-16 tires are about 33" tall, but I was still turning mid-3000 RPMs while driving 70-80 MPH the whole way.
I agree Joe, the point is he is right most don't like the screaming at todays freeway speeds. Back then it was 55 60 now 65 to 80 is the norm. He is right most dont' like that including me, but it really depends on the guys budget and use. The original topic was what his choices for his budget and use. It sounds like it's going to take more thrashing than cruising and with his budget 400 best choice. Can't have it all. That's why I bought up the other choice of changing gear sets and going with a higher gear. Again costs more, but no drive shaft, cross member, or electronic controller issue. If the trans has to be torn down anyway then your already in there. Hands down th400 best trans out there for abuse even in stock form. 4l80 is best O.D. for abuse. No surprise since it's based of a 400. I know plenty that have gone through 200's and 700's that just don't hold up even after having major investment in upgrades. Guys point out that GN's had 200's but even a 3.8L turbo didn't have 500ft of torque at 2k rpm which is what most 455's are capable of. Those guys are also likely running high stalls which helps. If you look at the size of the input and output shafts of the those transmissions mentioned it's easy to understand. The 200's and 700's have small input and output shafts that just can't take the torque. They snap, that's what I've seen. I have a friend that insisted on tying to make a 700 survive behind a serious 454 and even after spending $$$ on a shaft that was cryogenically treated it still snapped. He eventually went with a 4L80 in the end. Took a lot time, money, and broken promises for him to figure that out.
I think people are spoiled by new cars with double OD transmissions. No one here is claiming that the "street driven" cars on Drag Week (for example) are actually streetable, but the fact remains that when classic musclecars were new, they drove all day long at freeway speed (and that's pre-oil embargo freeway speeds) without overheating or the other world-ending problems you suggest. GM tested these cars for hours on the high speed track at the desert proving grounds before releasing them to the public. If you don't want to spin your motor that high, that's your call. 3500 RPM for sustained periods is not going to kill a 455 in good shape, nor will it damage the TH400 mated to it.
We will have to agree to disagree. The stock muscle cars of the 60's and 70's were very unreliable compared to modern cars. Engineering automotive technology has advanced a lot since then, the biggest jump being in the 90's and newer. The stock 455 Olds was not a reliable motor. The 350 Olds was way more reliable in stock form. One only has to visit the performance Olds 455 pages and see what is required to make a 455 engine survive today. Complete re-engineering of the oiling system, larger oil pan capacity, notching rods, going to studs on the mains or needing billet straps or a girdle on the bottom end, etc
I've known people who were actual mechanics back in the 60's and 70's for GM and they attested to how the vehicles would come in to the dealership with blown motors and under 10,000 miles on them. Not all these failure were due to abuse, it was just daily driving. Seeing a 455 turn over 75,000 miles without catastrophic failure was unheard of. 350's was a different story. Many 350's hit over 100,000 miles without major failures. Most factory 455's were lucky to make it to 50,000 miles without seeing an overhaul.
I have to disagree about GM putting the older muscle cars through rigorous tests. Today's modern testing makes the testing of the 60's and 70's look like a joke. Even things like fit and finish were atrocious back in the 60s-80's. Gapped & crooked panels, rattles, creaks, squeaks, rust, oil leaks, electrical issues, etc. Cork gaskets anyone? That was a failed gasket technology. Modern cars have advanced so much in those areas that it is a night and day difference.
This was evident in the odometers back then. They only went to 99,999 miles as a 100,000 mile vehicle was considered past its life expectancy. Today's cars have speedometers that have 6 digits as 100,000 miles on a modern car is easily attainable.
A stock 455 and 3.73+ gears spinning at 3,500- 4,000 RPM for extended periods was a ticking timebomb. A modern rebuilt 455 with all the required re-engineering and parts and $10,000+ later can survive those RPMs but it's still not ideal for a long stroke engine like the 455. A high revving small block, sure.
I appreciate the older muscle cars for what they were. I've owned and own both new and older muscle cars. Each has its place. When it comes to safety, reliability, mpg, ease to drive, better handling, braking, comfort, long term reliability, etc. there is no beating modern tech muscle cars like the Mustang, Corvette, Charger.
Last edited by pettrix; August 9th, 2018 at 01:50 PM.
We will have to agree to disagree. The stock muscle cars of the 60's and 70's were very unreliable compared to modern cars...
...The stock 455 Olds was not a reliable motor....
I've known people who were actual mechanics back in the 60's and 70's for GM and they attested to how the vehicles would come in to the dealership with blown motors and under 10,000 miles on them.
Wow...
I didn't just "know" people from the 60s and 70s, I was alive then and built and drove these cars. From your comments, you should probably just stick with LS motors.
Let's see, ALL the Olds 455 experts in the USA, they ALL state that the stock 455 had a lot of inherent problems that reduced it's reliability and longevity. Two bolt main caps with crappy weak bolts. Rope rear main seal that leaked from day one. A poorly designed oiling system that starved the bottom end of oil. Need I say more? Nobody rebuilds a 455 back to factory specs using factory parts and practices.
Of course, if one believes Oldsmobile can do no wrong and everything they built was the best. Those people cannot be reasoned with
Last edited by pettrix; August 9th, 2018 at 02:45 PM.
Let's see, ALL the Olds 455 experts in the USA, they ALL state that the stock 455 had a lot of inherent problems that reduced it's reliability and longevity. Two bolt main caps with crappy weak bolts. Rope rear main seal that leaked from day one. A poorly designed oiling system that starved the bottom end of oil. Need I say more? Nobody rebuilds a 455 back to factory specs using factory parts and practices.
Of course, if one believes Oldsmobile can do no wrong and everything they built was the best. Those people cannot be reasoned with
You're right - those W-30s were such pieces of crap that buyers couldn't even drive them off the lot before they exploded...
FYI, the Olds 350 used the same rope seal, the same two bolt caps, and the same oiling system.
Yep, got out of HS 71, in Milwaukee got a full time job at GE/Hotpoint.( VERY blessed to get a job in 71) And moonlighted at the Hellman Pontiac store at night and on the weekends in "make ready" Totally remember these buggies at the time. They even started to rust on the dealer lot-frame-suspension parts mostly. Look at this way, today we can make these old cars be more reliable and safe with today's technology to enjoy with family and friends. I currently have a 67 400E in my 64 F-85 that will be finished this year. Sooner or later I will replace it with a 425 or 455 built to today's specs and clearances and I feel confident that the engine will out last me. FYI-everything behind the engine was built to support the HP/torque of an Old's beast 500HP Plus.
I've just got to ask... if you think the olds motors were such crap why are you here??? I grew up at the end of this era, but my family ha always been into cars specifically a lot of Olds. I beg to differ again from experience. You likely are not believe me because you already made your opinions, but on what personal experience? Joe had one new, so can't argue with his opinions. Yes lots of them failed. I've seen plenty of new engineering crap like the Chrysler sludge 2.7 v6. Lets not forget GM's laws suite with CPI fuel injection. Not all new engineering is wonderful. I've seen lots of 2.2 gm ecotec's failing with just over 100k from sudden oil loss and locking up. So believe what you want if it makes you feel better.
I'll tell you some stories since you like them so much. l'm sure you will likley scuff at them anyway. These are personal experiences with the Olds 455.
1.) My family bought a 1968 Olds 98 first year for the 455. It stayed in the family till 1983 when it was sold having 180,000 miles on it. It passed though several family members including my brother that would race and abuse it. Only major failure it had was at about 80k miles the timing chain jumped and my dad had to replace that. He even ran it for a while with just retarding the distributor. That's not going to happen with todays cars.
2.) 1972 vista cruiser 455 pulled family camper every summer. sold with 75K on it, no major failures.
3.) neighbor had a 72 442 clone with a 455 that he put NOS on it, yes it blew up after a couple NOS runs, but it had 60k on it and he did nothing to it but put the NOS on it.
4.) relative has a 1953 Olds 98 with original rocket v8. Has 110k on it all original still runs, never rebuilt even Hydramatic trans works... amazing! from 1953
Now I do agree they have major advancements in engineering, metallurgy, and machining since then. Also electronic feedback fuel injection, variable cam timing, direct injection have all made leaps in performance. Yes safety is much better too. Now this is coming from a guy that is ASE certified and teaches on that very new stuff your boasting about. Again for a guy with supposedly 30 years with cars doesn't sound like you drove one of these when they were new like Joe did. I got them when they were all worn out, but driving one that's been frame off restored will change your mind about them being rattle traps.
I think what we have here is someone who just likes to argue no matter what. I usually don't waste my time.
Without anything technical as discussed above, throwing my two cents in, back in the day when we had Cutlasses, Vista Cruisers and Ninety-Eights with both small and big blocks, they were totally reliable. Rust proofing was not the greatest so yes, this was a weak spot, but we oiled most of the cars every autumn underneath. These vehicles could be depended upon to start and go in some of the worst driving conditions possible. Yes, we could make up the country roads with the Anti-Spin rear axles and a bit of weight in the trunk, especially with the larger Ninety-Eights. No electronic gee-gaws needed! As for engine reliability, maybe we had to look at timing chains at about 100,000 miles, but my uncle, who travelled a lot, often traded in his cars with the odometer on it's third time around by the 4th year of driving. Nothing flew apart, neither engine, transmissions or rear axles. The Delco wiring of the day was legendary of being impervious to salt, and allowing the cars to start be it humid, bitterly cold, ETC. When I got older, I had my first Vista Cruiser, a 1970, that I paid $40 for in 1983. The body had rust, but that car still gave me six years of service. Nothing leaked, it could take sustained highway speeds. Yes indeed, technology has advanced many fold since that 1970. When that 1970 was new, a 50 year old car was a 1920 model. They could not come anywhere close to the speed or agility of a 1970 anything. (Most) vehicles from 1970 ETC that are in good repair can safely keep up with modern traffic as long as you are aware of the braking limitations in some of them. As said above by the robski the old vehicles can be modified to be just as nimble as the new ones without being a total electronic nightmare. To agree with Joe P, yes, I had a cousin that had some pretty fast and large engined vehicles from several GM lines back in the day, and I am sure they had some pretty wild rear end gears in them by the way they took off! As a young kid hanging out with my cousin and his gearhead friends, watching them stuff cams and headers as well as different carburetors onto these beasts, I never remember any of the engines quitting because and they did see a lot of highway driving to get to the drag races. Thrashed around there and come back home under their own power. New cars are nice in their own ways, nobody even yawns when a car hits 200,000 miles these days. Demographics were different back then in our example year of 1970, To many, even in the USA, a car was a privilege and convenience to have, making life easier, up here in Canada, it was even harder ( why Canadian cars are often less optioned out then their US counterparts) so driving distances were often very much less then now. So yes, technology and age took a toll with the cork gaskets, ETC of the time. Hardly junk these Oldsmobiles, they did with the best they could at the time, and were a benchmark in overall. quality in my (subjective) opinion. I do remember us having out of many, three bad cars from back in the day, but these are another story two were not Oldsmobiles! One sadly was. We blinked and got burned for these decisions! Have a great evening all! Howie.
Sorry for the rant, just don't understand why you would be on an Olds enthusiast site if you think they are junk? Unless your out to start crap.
I never said the vehicles are junk or crap, those terms are yours, I never said that. Misquote and fake news
What I did state is that I appreciate the older muscle cars for what they were. I've owned and own both new and older muscle cars. Each has its place.
When enthusiasts restore them, they do a lot of upgrades that deviate from the original design and engineering. Better brakes, suspension, electrical and the engines get reworked with better engineering, better parts, better design applications, etc.
I don't know anyone who wants to deal with point distributors, external voltage regulators for the alternator, running the headlight voltage through the headlight switch instead of a relay setup, and on and on...
Case-in-point. The Olds differential. They were junk (you can quote me on that). Anyone running a 455 with decent power doesn't run an Olds rear end. They swap them over to Chevy 12-bolts or Ford 9-inch. The Olds differential was just poorly engineered and couldn't handle launches with traction. I dumped mine and replaced it with a Chevy 12-bolt.
Well gents - I do really appreciate all of the background and debates here. Being 38 myself I have to rely on my past experience and what I learned from my father on those “old” cars. Exactly why I started this thread, I need real world experience to help with what I haven’t already learned...
My 455 is coming back from getting machine work (bored, etc) prob Monday. I have been working very close with Cutlassefi (Mark) and on paper I’m going to have a very stout and powerful 455..technically a 468 ci as I had to take to .060 over....I will have 500+ HP and even higher torque
I still have to get a driveshaft and change my rear end diff gears as I am converting a stock 350/350 to the 442 I want.
Im also converting to a 17 inch tire and 4 wheel disk brakes.
so with this perscription, I’m wondering what’s the “best” setup for rear gears knowing I’m going to rebuild this TH400 I just picked up for 150 bucks. I will see a lot of highway as I live off of A1A in north Florida so 20-30 mile hikes on the interstate are the norm to get back and froth from Jacksonville to ST Augustine
I'd go with a 3.23 or 3.08 since your planning on highway driving. Engine makes enough torque you'll still have good off the line performance. If it was a 350 then things would be different.
I'd go with a 3.23 or 3.08 since your planning on highway driving. Engine makes enough torque you'll still have good off the line performance. If it was a 350 then things would be different.
Do I need to worry about my spline/axel's at all ? or just swap out the guts, slap the cover back on the diff and drive ? ** and yes I simplified a few steps here **
I'm not an expert on the drive shaft, but I've been told the 350 drive shafts were two piece with a rubber insert between the two pieces and the 455's were solid. the 400 is a longer trans so you'd have to get a 350 shortened. I'd just find a stock 455 drive shaft for it and be done with it. I had a custom shaft made for mine. There are repo's of the the drive shafts too from parts place inc. I don't know how good they are.
Yea Im def sourcing a new driveshaft, just didn't know if it was that easy on the gears or not...simple swap of the guts or if I had to also replace the axel shafts or not.
I'm not an expert on the drive shaft, but I've been told the 350 drive shafts were two piece with a rubber insert between the two pieces and the 455's were solid. .
All automatics (TH350 and TH400) got the concentric driveshafts with the rubber insert. Manual transmissions got the solid driveshafts.
Wow, had no idea the 4L80E had the same lousy two clutch OD set up, I assume that can be upgraded. I can tell you a 4 hour drive at 4000 rpm will get old fast and empty your wallet. These cars aren't new, now 50 years old and there are quite a few overheating complaints, especially with the 455. The problem with the BBO is heavy as hell parts with big bearings and again being 40 to 50 year old. Yes being able to do 70 mph at 2000 rpm and get 30+ mpg makes it tough to drive an old car even with 2.78 gears and running nearly 1000 rpm more. I am putting a 2004R and cruise in my 70S just for that reason. I like 2000 rpm at 70 mph and 20 mpg out of the old girl.
Neat, sounds about right. I ran around 3200rpm at 55mph. I still say if you don't want to go though all the work of putting an OD trans in, change the gear set and go with a 3.08 Best compromise IMO. Even using that online calculator you get the following:
1st gear with stock 2.48 ratio and 3.91 rear = 7.7mph @ 1000rpm
1st gear with lower 2.78 ratio and 3.08 rear = 8.7 mph @ 1000 rpm
3rd gear is still 1.1 but you drop about 500 rpm with a 3.08 but you get almost the same results out of the hole. I give him credit for wanting to drive it regularly. I don't drive mine on highway anymore so really doesn't concern me. Those days are done, just cruising around town and track occasionally. It really depends on what you want. Bottom line is it's gonna cost money and work to have it all. I'm considering doing that change in future.
Wow, had no idea the 4L80E had the same lousy two clutch OD set up, I assume that can be upgraded.
Yes there are lots of upgrades for the 4L80 with aftermarket controllers becoming more reasonable there are a lot more guys going that route now. As someone pointed out, if you go the chevelle sites you'll find lots of info on it.
Wow, had no idea the 4L80E had the same lousy two clutch OD set up, I assume that can be upgraded. I can tell you a 4 hour drive at 4000 rpm will get old fast and empty your wallet. These cars aren't new, now 50 years old and there are quite a few overheating complaints, especially with the 455. The problem with the BBO is heavy as hell parts with big bearings and again being 40 to 50 year old. Yes being able to do 70 mph at 2000 rpm and get 30+ mpg makes it tough to drive an old car even with 2.78 gears and running nearly 1000 rpm more. I am putting a 2004R and cruise in my 70S just for that reason. I like 2000 rpm at 70 mph and 20 mpg out of the old girl.
The best upgrade on my 72 Olds was the 2004R. It was by far the best update to make it more enjoyable and streetable. Going down the highway @ 70mph at 2,000 rpm is pretty awesome. So much less wear and tear on the engine and drivetrain. Better mpg, less noise and runs cool.
The new Corvettes have the 8L90E and the 1st gear ratio is a mouth dropping 4.56
WOW!
Today's muscle cars are pretty awesome. Dodge Demon or Hellcat with the 800HP & 700 LB.FT of torque from the factory with a warranty. Dodge offers trans brakes, line locks, etc right from the factory. 203 mph top speed and still gets 24mpg with the AC on. 10.8 seconds at 131 mph in the 1/4 mile. Top speed: 203 mph. All from the factory with a warranty to boot. Amazing stuff.
Wow, had no idea the 4L80E had the same lousy two clutch OD set up, I assume that can be upgraded. I can tell you a 4 hour drive at 4000 rpm will get old fast and empty your wallet. These cars aren't new, now 50 years old and there are quite a few overheating complaints, especially with the 455. The problem with the BBO is heavy as hell parts with big bearings and again being 40 to 50 year old. Yes being able to do 70 mph at 2000 rpm and get 30+ mpg makes it tough to drive an old car even with 2.78 gears and running nearly 1000 rpm more. I am putting a 2004R and cruise in my 70S just for that reason. I like 2000 rpm at 70 mph and 20 mpg out of the old girl.
The overdrive clutch is pretty big in diameter. And when the trans is in overdrive, it has to deal with only about 70% of the engines torque. Once again, Hydromatic engineers knew what they were doing, I can’t recall ever
seeing burned overdrive clutches during an overhaul, I can’t remem ever seeing any with any serious wear.
August 7th, 2018, 09:50 AM
